"Mr. Bush should also have come up with a more thoughtful answer to the urgent request Mr. Karzai made on Monday to transfer Afghan prisoners now under United States military custody to Kabul's control."
Absolutely.
President Karzai has been amazing. I remember a picture of him, The Former King who lives in Rome if he is still alive. Last I remember he was in his eighties. The picture I have is of those two and the current Foreign Minister Dr. Abdullah Abdullah sitting together under a tree 'beaming from ear to ear' as their return to sanity in Afghanistan. Dr. Abdullah Abdullah was a great resource for the USA in those beginning days and I cherish the picture of he carrying his young daughter in his arms dressed in proper Afghan attire.
There is no doubt in my mind this leadership has been among the greatest ever to walk this Earth. They have taken a country of Warlords and sewn the beginnings of 'justice' and 'equity' into it's continually unraveling seams.
THE DRUG ECONOMIES OF THE WORLD.
They exist because they are lucrative and require no knowledge except good old fashion farming know how. Oddly enough the farmers aren't the ones that get the biggest profits but are the ones under most pressure to produce. In Afghanistan it is Poppies. In Columbia it is Coca Leaves. I don't recall what it is in Indonesia, but, one can count on a huge cash crop of something illegal in that climate and plenty of it.
Wherever one finds these types of crops there is always control of the government by the cartel. If not direct control as in Osama bin Laden's Afghanistan then indirect control but the populous supported and the power wheeled as in Indonesia.
Gangs in the USA thrive on Drug Economies providing their source of government control in the way of mayhem creating territories of cities to dangerous to venture into even for law enforcement at times.
All these 'trouble spots' have the same thing in common in that it takes persistence over time to reclaim the 'territory' from the clutches crime and it's drug economy and instill a substitute that people value AND with a return to order a different appreciation for living.
It's not easy.
Drug Economies also serve of masking subversive moments such as the Uzbeks practice seeking drug monies from it's Afghanistan Warlords and carrying out attacks of 'soft targets' in places like Beslan. It is my belief at times when a legitimate government such as the USA wants to undermine what it's administration deems 'undesirable' there is AN ALLOWANCE OF TOLERANCE to these 'drug economies' as it degrades the esteem of the current government of that country. I firmly believe the USA's lack of action regarding the drug issues of Afghanistan has served that purpose with Russia's Beslan. But, Putin would set that aside to conduct business as usual to some extent being a peace maker and also hugging trees for Kyoto. If nothing else he knows where to point fingers himself.
There is an interesting case that has been conducted in Indonesia, the Corby Case.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Both-sides-to-appealbr-20year-jail-sentence/2005/05/27/1117129870467.html
According to Ms. Corby what happened to her could have happened to anyone. Her insistence of her innocence is that her luggage was sabotaged and filled with drugs while she was traveling to Indonesia from Australia. It reminds of that greeting that chronically plays in USA airports these days, "Please keep all carry-ons close by..." It's possible. At any rate all during this trial there has been a great deal of scrutiny of the proceedings and there was a definitive favoritism of the prosecution and victimization of the defense. There is no doubt this women was going to prison right from the start and in Indonesia one can get the death penalty for this crime.
Why then would the courts be corrupt? It's drug, baby. It's an underground economy that serve the terrorists there and in unwritten law if the 'streets' of Jakarta are to remain orderly there better not be an investigation further than the prosecution of Ms. Corby.
WITH THAT sad reality we come full circle back to Afghanistan and the patient, devout and dedicated President Karzai whom in my opinion needs an unequivocal and resounding "YES" to all his requests while asking him if he is sure that is enough?
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The New York Times Editorial
The Poppies of Afghanistan
It requires breathtaking audacity for United States officials to complain that efforts to curb opium poppy production in Afghanistan have been lagging because President Hamid Karzai "has been unwilling to assert strong leadership." Washington waited almost two and a half years to heed Mr. Karzai's calls for help on this problem.
Even now, the Bush administration is disproportionately concentrating on the most visible, but least effective approach, forcible crop eradication, which merely moves the problem around and enriches traffickers by raising the price of their opium holdings. It is also creating turmoil in rural areas during the run-up to this year's crucial parliamentary elections.
Mr. Karzai was right to use his just-completed four-day visit to the United States to press for coordinating eradication with the crop substitution, agricultural credit and alternative development programs that would provide Afghanistan's rural population with better ways to feed their families. The money that Washington has promised for those broader efforts has been lagging behind, and the planning that will be required to spend that money wisely has barely begun.
Blaming Mr. Karzai may look smart in Washington, where forcible eradication has always been more popular than long-term alternative development. But it is costly folly in Afghanistan, where the politically nimble Mr. Karzai has slowly begun to turn around an almost impossible situation, gradually extending the writ of the central government and nurturing a fragile electoral process. Instead of using Mr. Karzai as a scapegoat for its own failed anti-drug policies, Washington should now be doing all it can to help him create favorable conditions for those parliamentary elections, which have had to be repeatedly postponed.
Mr. Bush should also have come up with a more thoughtful answer to the urgent request Mr. Karzai made on Monday to transfer Afghan prisoners now under United States military custody to Kabul's control.
Mr. Karzai's anguish over this issue is understandable. Two Times articles in recent days have documented the inexcusable breakdowns at the Bagram detention center that let American soldiers almost casually torture an innocent Afghan prisoner to death in 2002 and then saw Army investigators in Afghanistan try to close the case without any charges being brought. Seven of those suspected of involvement in the abuse have finally been charged after a nearly two-year delay that even the Pentagon acknowledges seems "excessively long."
As Afghanistan's democratically elected president and a proven American ally, Mr. Karzai would have been remiss not to call for turning over the remaining Afghan prisoners. Washington should work with his government to build and staff secure Afghan-run detention centers so that those transfers can take place at an early date.
Regrettably, Mr. Karzai came away from the White House on Monday without any visible progress on either of these issues.
